Does Cld. Cupich Think Hitler was Good or Bad?

Friday, March 16, 2018

Does Cld. Cupich Think Hitler was Good or Bad?

On Face the Nation Cupich said he would give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians

On Feb. 1, the National Catholic Reporter reported that Cardinal Blase Cupich attacked the “Benedict Option”:

“‘That’s not who we are, ‘Cupich said of the “Benedict Option,’ which takes its name from a book that calls for a conservative counterculture… Instead, Cupich said, Catholics should go out and engage the world, much like Jesus’ disciples after Pentecost, or those who fought Hitler in World War II.” []

How would the Cardinal have engaged Hitler in World War II?

Does Cupich think Hitler was good or bad?

Below is a list that the Cardinal would most likely agree with from the liberal on Hitler’s so-called good and bad points:

“Good. For following –
  • Animal rights & Environmental protection rights [and gun control].
  • Volkswagen (People’s Car).
  • Autobahn.
  • Anti-smoking & Anti tobacco campaigns.
  • Bringing Germany out of poverty, unemployment.
  • Free health care
  • Putting a gun on his head and shooting. But it was too late.
  • All the Science & Tech advancements of his time. Germany under Hitler was way ahead in Sci-Tech than any other country. There are theories that US stole all their (Germany’s) rocket science, and other technologies, and kidnap Nazi scientists and forced them to work for them(US), and only because of these scientists that US is able to progress so easily in Space and Rocket science in 60s, 70s. Though I don’t know how true it is but this theory has some strong evidences present on the internet.
“Bad. For Following
  • Holocaust.
  • Concentration Camps.
  • Killing, torturing, not hundreds, not thousands but millions of Jews in only few months.
  • World War II.
  • Invading many European nations.
  • Killing thousands of Non-Jews [and legalizing abortion].”[]

Even though Cupich is personally against abortion he said on Face the Nation said that he would give Communion to pro-abortion politicians. Hitler was such a politician. He legalized abortion in Germany.

In his interview with Face the Nation the then Archbishop Blase Cupich was asked:

“When you say we cannot politicize the communion rail, you would give communion to politicians, for instance, who support abortion rights.”

Cupich said on Face the Nation in 2014 that he would give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians:

“I would not use the Eucharist or as they call it the communion rail as the place to have those discussions or a way in which people would be either [sic] excluded from the life of the church. The Eucharist is an opportunity of grace and conversion. It’s also a time of forgiveness of sins. So my hope would be that that grace would be instrumental in bringing people to the truth.” []

In 1933, when the Nazis came to power, one of pro-abortion politician Hitler’s first acts was to legalize abortion for the “health of the mother” which meant abortion on demand. By 1935 Germany had 500,000 abortions a year.[]

Cupich stated that pro-abortion politicians like Hitler should receive Holy Communion and he, also, explicitly said cutting up babies is morally equal, much the same as, joblessness and other issues. The Chicago Cardinal said:

“While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness.”

In 2015, Cardinal Cupich sounded like a Nazi sympathizer when he compared the genocide and mutilation of unborn babies to joblessness and other issues.

He compared the “Planned Parenthood grisly traffic in aborted babies body parts to… joblessness and a broken immigration system.”
(“Leftist CDL Cupich In Running to Chair US Bishops’ Pro-Life Committee,” Church Militant, October 24, 2017)

Would Cupich call Hitler “Prolife” since he agreed with many of his consistent ethic of life stances?

Hitler agreed with many of Cupich’s consistent ethic of life stances.

The Cardinal and Hitler stand united in the following consistent ethic issues. The Nazi dictator fought against joblessness and anti-environmentalism.

The progressive pro-Cupich magazine Commonwealth reported that Pope Francis, in an article titled “How Pope Francis Reframed the Politics of Being ‘Prolife,'” now says:

Being “prolife” is not a “single-issue” and, also, means ”’the environment devastated by man’s predatory relationship with nature’… undocumented immigrants and unemployed workers.”
(Commonwealth, By John Gehring, September 13, 2017)

Since pro-life is not a single issue then by Cupich’s Nazi sympathizer-like reasoning then Hitler’s grisly death camp genocide should be counterbalanced by the fact that the Nazi government reduced unemployment from six million to one million and was one of the first to create environmental protection laws.

Francis and the Cardinal in their statements down play the abortion genocide while making climate change a top priority and appear to, also, equate environmentalism (and even tobacco smoking which was just outlawed in the Vatican) with having a consistent ethic life position.

By their reasoning Hitler was pro-life since it’s not a single issue and he agreed with many of Cupich and Francis’s consistent ethic of life stances.

Hitler had a “stance against Tobacco use” and the “Nazi’s were the first to create environmental protection laws in history” according to the Nazi sympathizer website europeanknights
(12 Things You We’re Not Told About Adolph Hitler and Nazi (NSDAP) Germany,” January 13, 2017)

The scholarly book “How Green Were the Nazis?: Nature, Environment, and Nation in the Third Reich,” also, impartially reports that Hitler’s government “mounted the most effective anti-smoking propaganda campaign ever before 1980” and “nature protection and conversation laws… from an environmentalist perspective, the best in the world.” (, First review) pointed out that Cupich said abortion “is a ‘controversial issue.’ It needs to be ‘put behind us so the government can focus on it’s budget.'”

This statement sounds like something similar to what a Nazi sympathizer would say:

The Jewish genocide is a “controversial issue,” it needs to be put behind us so the government can focus on it’s budget, joblessness, environmental issues and train prices.

The Lifesitenews responding to the Chicago Cardinal’s statement said:

“Your Eminence, abortion is immoral because it kills… Dietrich Bonhoeffer didn’t fret about train prices in Nazi Germany. He spoke truth to power about the genocide of Jews and eventually lost his life.”
(“Cardinal Cupich shows his priorities in responses to two different tragedies,” November 8, 2017,

Say a Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.

Get AQ Email Updates

8 comments on “Does Cld. Cupich Think Hitler was Good or Bad?

  1. A suggestion from AQ’s crack research team in its luxuriously appointed Nomen est Omen Dept. in Lompoc, CA, a town dear to all Roger Ramjet fans…

    “We need a newsletter titled something like “ConCupichSins” to highlight the crass political mentality of this individual and the moral depravity of his “rainbow agenda inclusivity” mantra.
    “Like all wingnut libs, he’s a socialist con artist and theological basket case. So was Hitler.
    “And like all lying demagogues, the chief prelate and wannabe Reichschancellor of the Windy City will say anything to promote his own agenda, no matter how many divine, natural or civil laws stand in his eager beaver way. Just as Hitler did.
    “Right now, ConCupichSins’ #1 goal is to increase his margin over McElroy in the race to make himself the first American to become elected pope.”

  2. I’m not accusing him of that depravity personally, but he has been raising the rainbow flag ever since he blew into the Windy City, as far as I know.
    However, as a matter of Lenten self-correction, I revise my suggestion for the proposed newsletter title to:
    “Is ConCupich’s ‘Sense’ A Sin?”,

    Referring, of course, to his pro-sod, pro-“serial-adultery-with -Holy Communion privileges seminars” and his dangerous claims before national and int’l media hacks, obviously intended to reach the public and win converts for the infamous and morally subversive New Paradigm.

  3. Oh, %!$@#*%%@$!!!!
    Glancing back, I had missed the point about a smoking ban inside VC.

  4. One thing we can be sure of: that con, Cupich, sins.
    Is he a homo?
    At LEAST mentally he is.
    Anyone who smiles and turns the other way when faced with sin, or who excuses sin, condones that sin.
    That means that he himself, even if he does not or has not done it, *will* do it if and when he ever feels like it.
    To be accessory to murder is to commit murder in your heart, to be accessory to faggery is to commit faggery in your heart, just like to lust after a woman is to commit adultery in your heart.
    Like Jesus said.
    Oh, BTW, Fr. Jim Martin, you who know so much about Jesus, that’s another thing about Jesus that you would have heard about… if you weren’t AWOL.

  5. It just seems like modernists who desire other men’s behinds have an enthusiasm for enabling pro-abortion pseudo-Catholic politicians. Perhaps because they are liberals who support the gender-bender agenda in legislative debates in Washington. Whatever the reason, the connection between a desire for sodomy and the institutional enabling of sacrilege by pro-abortion Catholic liberal politicians should be studied. Perhaps Bergoglio has a few modernist clowns on his advisory staff who could look into it.

  6. Just to be clear: the main issue is about pro-abortion liberal politicians who support the murder and dismemberment of unborn children being given Holy Communion by modernist clergy at the Novus Ordo (in the Spirit of Vatican II) and fruitcake modernist bishops saying that is OK and fine with them on network news television shows controlled by the anti-Catholic secret societies to advance Malthusian population control.

    In that one statement – that sacrilege is OK – he is not qualified to be a Catholic priest or to have lawful custody of the Blessed Sacrament. It’s a violation of canon law to deliberately promote or enable sacrilege. Someone who says in the public record that sacrilege is acceptable CANNOT be a Catholic priest in the Roman Catholic Church. You realize, he has excommunicated himself latae sententiae automatically. It does not require a canonical proceeding. He is no longer a Catholic priest or any kind of Catholic in good standing.

  7. I think they’re all busy learning Chinese, right now. But I’m sure they’ll hop right on your suggestion, Howl, once the body count of Catholics behind the Scarlet Bamboo Curtain reaches its inevitably Stalinist result, becoming a mere “statistic”, and the dumb-as-a-stump pew sitters still financing the Revolution just tune out one more Bergoglian catastrophe, chalking it up to his humble intentions.

Leave a Reply